Why Couldn’t He Have Taken a Three-Day Rest?

Cats aren't omnipotent. They just think they are.

Our seven-day week seems to be based on the Genesis myth. Our five-day work week is the result of the labor movement. Clearly, unions are more powerful than God. However, starting primarily with the Reagan administration, labor unions are being destroyed in this country. I guess Republicans think they’re more powerful than unions. Using the transitive property, that means they also think they’re more powerful than God.

Given that the agenda of the Republican party is to return us to the Middle Ages, I wouldn’t be surprised if they succeed in restoring the six-day work week. They seem well on their way to accomplishing that in my lifetime.

If God had been more efficient, such as whipping everything together in three days, his one day of rest would have given us a reasonable deal. The week would consist of Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday (Most of those days are named after other gods, BTW. That must really chafe Yahweh’s ass!). I’d then have a three-day work week and then take a day off. That’s a tolerable life.

Or maybe God could have created the world in five days and rested for two. Then we never would have had to fight for the five-day work week in the first place.

But why couldn’t God have rested for three days? Who would notice? It’s not like he has a job to get to (does he?). That would give us a four-day work week and a guaranteed three-day weekend every week. All of our lives are so busy, we could all use that.

This begs the question, though: Why did God even need a day of rest in the first place? That implies he got fatigued. If he got fatigued, he isn’t omnipotent. He also should have been able to poof the universe together in an instant (you know, like one big bang). The fact that he required any time at all proves he is not omnipotent. And if he’s not omnipotent, then (to steal a line from Epicurus) why call him God?

God isn't omnipotent. He just thinks he is.

This is a convoluted way of saying that I’ve been very busy lately, which you have probably noticed by the sparsity of new posts. That photography class I’ve been taking is ending tonight. Hopefully that will allow me to resume my desired schedule of 2–3 posts per week. I’m also planning to resume the Darwin Was Wrong articles. Maybe I can slap one of those together next weekend.

Did you notice above how cleverly I snuck in a reference to the transitive property? That’s so I could refer you to a new blog, Divisible by Pi. Its perpetrator, Richard, sent me a message two weeks ago asking me to visit and check it out. The blog is about atheism and math. If you knew what the transitive property was without looking it up, then you’re probably the type of person who would like Divisible by Pi.

He does use that weird non-Americanism, though, where they refer to mathematics as a whole as “maths”. That’s not at all like fingernails on a chalkboard, is it? Math is a collective noun! It’s like “moose” or “cattle”. It doesn’t need an “s”!

8 Responses to “Why Couldn’t He Have Taken a Three-Day Rest?”

  1. Thomas Says:

    The shift away from a traditional work week isn’t so much a product of the weakening of unions, though that does play a part, as it is to the ongoing transition from an industrial to a service economy and of certain class divisions that show up in people’s professional lives.

    As long as those with the most wealth and power work “bankers hours” those that provide them with services will need to do so outside of the hours when the privileged are working. Restaurants, amusement parks, theatres, call centers, IT repair and a myriad of other industries that are a growing segment of the economy simply can’t work 9-5×5. At least they can’t the way the world is currently structured.

    Personally, I work 65 hour weeks and at very strange hours and that’s how I prefer it. I just wish there was more stuff that was open when I’m inclined to need things. Perhaps nighttime only bookstore. Then again, I can’t ask the rest of the world to cater to my desires; shame a large segment of the world doesn’t recognize that.

  2. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Thomas – the disappearance of a 40 hour work week and the disappearance of 9-5×5 do not necessarily need to go hand in hand. The problem is not that society is increasing in the number of “weird hours” jobs related to the afforementioned service economy (and other factors). The problem is that each employee is expected to work more than what would be the equivelent of 9-5×5, but on a different shift.

    You see, 9-5×5 doesn’t even exist anymore, at all! Who works 35 hours per week in the USA? At best, and I mean this is considered slacker where I work, the least you can work is 8-5×5. We are expected to work late frequently, despite this not even reflected in our pay — salary doesn’t get overtime anymore!

    And I wouldn’t mind a 60 hour work week, if I was paid like I was working a 60 hour work week.

    A modern worker’s bill of rights needs to be implemented. It’s no coincidence that we work more but are LESS productive than our European counterparts. When you are overtired and overworked, you are less productive. Management sees this as the necessity to crack the whip and force more hours — damn lazy peons! But the reality is that we need a fricking bone thrown to us.

  3. Ron Britton Says:

    Thomas:

    I was referring to the creation of the 40-hour work week, which was the result of unions, not its demise, which is the result of many factors.

    ParrotLover:

    I don’t know where the term “9 to 5″ came from. As far as I know, no significant fraction of the workforce ever worked those hours. Back in the old days (e.g., 1950s–1970s), I believe everybody worked 8 to 5. There did seem to be a fair amount of speculation that in the future the work week would shrink. I remember my high school social studies teacher claiming that in the future people would be working five 7-hour days or four 9-hour days.

    The closest I came to that was in 1986, when I worked for the Burger King regional office. I worked 7½ hours per day (8:30 to 5:00). They considered themselves very progressive. Supposedly our pay was structured so we were earning a comparable amount to what other folks were making in 40 hours. I didn’t stay at that job long. I wonder how long that experiment lasted. I’m sure they went back to 40 hours some time later.

  4. Jeff Eyges Says:

    I remember my high school social studies teacher claiming that in the future people would be working five 7-hour days or four 9-hour days.

    And another thing – where are those flying cars we were promised?

  5. Helena Says:

    I didn’t recognize that quote as being from Epicurus.

    Of course, its hard to prove a negative, but look here:

    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Epicurus

    It seems to be Hume speaking in Epicurus’ voice, as it were.

  6. PaulJ Says:

    “Maths” is short for Mathematics. What’s “Math” short for?

    (You will note, of course, the domain-name suffix I use…)

  7. Ron Britton Says:

    “Maths” is short for Mathematics. What’s “Math” short for?

    Mathematics. You should take the extra S from “maths” and put it on the end of “sport”.

  8. nazani14 Says:

    My Daughter, to whom I cede in all matters mythological, tells me that the 7-day week is older than Hebrew traditions, as it was used in Babylon, Sumer, and Akkad (so blame the Iraqis.) Possibly it has to do with worshiping the 7 most visible celestial bodies.